the evolving mind

I love nature, and am somewhat of an environmentalist. I do worry about about what kind of world this generation leaves future generations.

At the same time, I am also cautious not to be a blind sentimentalist: valuing the things in my world simply because I have had positive experiences with them. Perhaps that explains why I can welcome the news of a new fruit . . . created by scientists.

Citrus researchers at the University of California, Riverside have released a new mandarin (or tangerine) for commercial production. Named ‘DaisySL’ for Daisy seedless, the new fruit is finely textured and juicy, with a rich, sweet and distinctive flavor when mature. Its rind is smooth and thin, and bears a deep orange color.

[From, New Seedless Tangerine-Like Citrus Plant Developed]

Sounds delicious. How did they do it? [Cue background music fit for a Frankenstein flick now . . . ] Through a “mutation breeding project” and by grafting different species of fruit trees together! Oh my!

I don’t know whether the above qualifies as hard genetic engineering or soft, but allow me to explain how I view the difference. Soft genetic engineering is the creation of new food varieties by the selection and crossing of specimens over many, many generations (plant generations). Hard genetic engineering takes a huge short-cut, using advanced technology to splice desired genes in and undesired out.

When considering the desirability of genetically modified foods, this scenario comes to mind: You are an ancient, stone-age human. You walk out of the forest across a paved road (what the hell is that!) and discover a family garden heavy with ripe vegetables. What do you think?

My guess is part of the feeling could be worded this way: What monstrosities! What freaks of nature! Such small plants, such huge fruit!

If I grew up in a time of dinky, 3-inch ears of corn, would I be sentimental about that variety? Maybe. But I think I would quickly grow accustomed to sinking my teeth into the modern form.

Viva genetic change!

Technorati Links: evolution, perception

I will be hosting the 118th Skeptics’ Circle (post date: August 27th). If you have blogged about something skeptical-y, consider sending it my way. The theme: Looking Closely.

If you’ve closely examined a subject/event, and come to some share-worthy insights into the bogosity OR actual validity of a claim, do submit your blog post for possible inclusion in the carnival.

Technorati Links: blog carnivals

To be a star you have to do the things a star does. Burning unimaginable hot and sometimes shooting plasma arches far into space are two things our home star does, the sun.

So to be is to do? I suspect so.

Photo thanks to NASA.

Technorati Links: cosmos

I can see religious conservatives pulling this quote from a science article out of context already -

In the past nearly four decades, black women have made great gains in higher education rates, yet these gains appear to have come increasingly at the cost of marriage and family.

Perhaps they’d even mention that the source of that sentence was a professor of sociology at YALE University.

Yep, look what happens when women leave the kitchen and go to college: their marriage and family suffers!

But wait, careful minds want to know, how do their marriages and family suffer? The answer: they don’t. Huh? How could this be? Well, you’d have to look no farther then the title of the piece to find out. Or read the entire article, but who does that?

It seems that the rate of marriage and child-bearing is going down for educated black women. The way their education is “costing” marriage and family is that less black women are getting married and having a family. So it is not actually marriages or actual children that are suffering, but potential marriages and potential children.

Does education abort a family? Should it be outlawed?

As you might guess, I applaud the news. Education is a good thing, even if it leads to fewer marriages and children. The second of those two I would actually include in the benefits of education to society. But not because I am anti-children. I am anti too many children.

Technorati Links: culture, religion, sociology

News flash: Add squirrels to the list of animals capable of learning by observation. New research out of the University of Exeter has shown -

how squirrels can quickly learn from watching their peers, particularly if it relates to stealing food.

So that’s how those tree-rats foil my bird-seed-theft-prevention measures en masse!

Actually, I like squirrels. But not when they figure out how to commit grand larceny.

Hmm. Makes me wonder if squirrels have mirror neurons in their corn-kernel-sized brains.

A mirror neuron is a neuron that fires both when an animal acts and when the animal observes the same action performed by another animal (especially by another animal of the same species). Thus, the neuron “mirrors” the behavior of another animal, as though the observer were itself acting. [Wikipedia]

Will we next discover that these arboreal rodents are capable of empathy? I kind of doubt it, but who knows!

Technorati Links: animals, cognition, neurology

To what degree are works of art dependent upon an interpretation-of-inkblots-type brain activity?

Certainly our brain responds to what we see much more complexly than the set of light-sensitive pixels in a digital camera. And besides bottom-up processing — the meaning built from the smallest bits — there is also top-down influence — what we already know or feel will influence what we perceive at the bottom level.

Hmm. Just a thought. Those flowers sure are purty, though. Well, to my brain they are.

Technorati Links: flora, nature, perception

Care to venture a guess as to whether moms or dads are more likey to employ the parenting practices of their own parents?

Tic, toc, tic, toc . . . Ding! Time’s up.

The answer comes via a recent EurekAlert! article:

When it comes to how they raise their children, mothers today tend to follow the same practices their own mothers did, according to a new study that looked at parenting practices across two generations.

Interesting. Is a girl’s mind more primed to observe and imitate nurturing behavior, while boys later learn it on-the-fly? The study brought to mind primate research that disclosed poor parenting among orphaned females. It was speculated that the girl apes missed out on an important learning experience by not having a mother of their own.

The current research into human parenting also revealed that practices and habits do change. Some of the recent trends include an increase in both the amount of affection shown children and time spent reading with them, while the amount of spanking is decreased. So culture also influences the behavior of moms and dads.

A last thought: I wonder how orphaned males later perform as dads, whether they be human or non-human primate? Of course, among many species the males may father children, but then play no role in raising them.

Technorati Links: behavior, parenting

Any idea what the above mystery substance is (despite the poor quality photo)? Hints: It is at x200 magnification; I collected it in my backyard; it is edible, but not to me; a small amount is good for some of those that eat it, but too much can be deadly. Answer and another pic below the fold.

Continue Reading »

Technorati Links: biology, microscope, puzzle

1) Is there such a thing as “stellar aerobics?” One might wonder if they merely read the title to this science article: Cosmic Dance Helps Galaxies Lose Weight.

Wow. So there really is a music of the spheres, first postulated by ancient philosophers. I wonder what type of music the galaxies are dancing to. The golden oldies? Or maybe something more up-tempo for greater weight loss potential. But do galaxies lose weight or is mass a better word?

What is really going on? Thanks to computer simulations of “encounters” between forming galaxies, here’s what the researchers found.

The team found that the galactic encounters excite a gravitational process which they term “resonant stripping,” leading to the removal of stars from the smaller dwarf over the course of the interaction and transforming it into a dwarf spheroidal.

How the writer got from there to his/her title is intriguing. My guess is vodka played a role.

2) Hang on to your broccoli and your preconceptions, for here is a one title and article bound to stun many and maybe even incite denial in legions of members of the church of the holy tomato: Organic Food Not Nutritionally Better Than Conventionally-produced Food, Review Of Literature Shows. Of course, the article does not address other potential benefits of organic farming (of the small variety): ecological impact, social/economic considerations, etc.

And maybe the scientists were unable to measure the “spiritual nutrition” provided by organically-grown food. Using authentic animal dung rather than a bag a fertilizer is undeniably better for producing chakra-enhancing foods. Isn’t it?

3) Can a machine be made out of microbes? Is it still a machine if it is alive? We are facing a brave new future, and my feeling is that most of it will be good. Case in point: Scientists have discovered means of producing electricity and desalinating water — two very important resources — through the use of “microbial desalination cells.”

What a wonderfully symbiotic relationship that would be! If we can call it symbiotic. Feed wastewater to human-designed host-chambers full of microbes; they get fed while we harness cleaner water and electricity. Brilliant! [source]

Oh-oh. I just thought of something. Would people view the microbes as animals we are using as a slave force against their will or as nature hadn’t intended? Would PETA lobby for civil rights for prokaryotes?

Technorati Links: cosmos, health, microbes

Some who doubt evolution say there is a lack of proof. What they want is one slam-dunk piece of evidence of evolution occurring. Trouble is, like the motion of flip-book images, a single page, a single piece of data, will never encapsulate the whole of a dynamic process.

Take this photo of evolution in action [source]:

It’s just a bird, right? Well, yes, but it is also a likely “transitional form.” Two populations of one bird species are undergoing a plumage divergence. And that change is likely heading down the road to speciation.

In the article Study Catches Two Bird Populations As They Split Into Separate Species you will read:

The question of whether these two populations are on the road to speciation comes down to sex. When two populations stop exchanging genes—that is, stop mating with each other—then they can be considered distinct species. Uy and his team wanted to see if these flycatchers were heading in that direction.

One crucial bit of “evidence” that speciation is likely occurring consists not of a single photo or of a preserved skeleton or of anything you can hold in your hand. The evidence is bird behavior. Behavior.

That males from the two populations no longer view the other as a reproductive threat is a good indication that not much mating is taking place between the two groups. Their evolutionary paths are diverging, Uy and his team found—all because of a change in plumage.

Fascinating.

While science does take more effort to comprehend than the blind acceptance of religious claims, the payoff is immense.

Technorati Links: belief, Intelligent Design